Teddy Ruxpin is Not Dated; An article by C. Illiop

[Deleted]

I recall seeing, recently, a post here where it was mentioned that, compared to modern toys, Teddy Ruxpin seems dated, and can only hope to capture the nostalgia market should he be relaunched again, and that all sorts of high-tech alterations would need to be made in order to make today's kids interested in him. I'm grateful that this was posted, as I found this to be an interesting thing to think about, and, after mulling over it for a long while, I decided to collect my thoughts on the matter and write them down.

I should start by noting that I have a great passion for wondrous, creative fictional universes everywhere - in books, toys, games, television, film, and so on - and have thus spent a great deal of time observing and understanding other people's reactions to these things. Being a toy-maker, it kind of goes with the territory, I guess. This, I feel, is relevant, because I don't believe that Teddy's appeal lies in anything to do with technology at all, but instead is firmly rooted in the realm of imagination.

Now, it's a fact that, after Teddy's original run back in the 1980s and early 1990s, which was flooded with work-alikes and knock-offs, there has really only been one other vaguely similar "adventurous bear/talking toy" franchise - T.J. Bearytales. I know that he's not well-liked around here, but it can't be denied that T.J. was, as I understand it, decently successful. Aside from having a few extra moving parts and being less soft, his functionality is more-or-less the same as that of Teddy Ruxpin - but nobody found him to be "dated" (indeed, quite the opposite, I gather).

To go a little further with the comparison to T.J. Bearytales, it's worth nothing that he was up against the 2006 revival of Teddy Ruxpin, which neatly brings me to the nostalgia market. Now, I fully understand that BackPack Toys did the very best they could on what I've gotten the impression was a shoestring budget, up against much larger companies, and I'm not criticising them in any way for going with what's often believed to be a safe bet, but I do feel that taking the nostalgia approach with how the then-new digital Teddy was marketed was a mistake. There's a good reason for this: Other franchises making comebacks which instead take the approach of speaking to their target audience directly won't run into the mindset of "This product's not relevant anymore - they're just going for nostalgia." as badly, thus saving them from a bit of potential bad (or at least poor) press. Whilst these thoughts will be there with some people to some degree, aiming the message at the younger generation generally appears to do better, and does just as well at gaining the attention and approval of now-grown-up fans who have kids of their own (it's well-known that there's a built-in degree of trust among the previous generation, with these sorts of revivals). Indeed, this is generally a recipe for success with any series, be it new or old.

Back during Teddy's first run, there were many wannabes, and a great deal of these were not as functional as Teddy Ruxpin was - I'm sure we're all familiar with the sorts of one-trick electronic plushes from back then, such as the bears who "spoke" by simply moving their mouth in a set pattern when you talked into an attached microphone, or ones that made a noise when you squeezed them/clapped your hands/etc. but did not necessarily animate. Indeed, one such one-trick toy, considered outdated by the time it launched was, I gather, Baby Teddy Ruxpin. Toys like these were considered to be way behind Teddy's standard back then, and yet now, they are the only option for interactive plush toys at all. Given this, how could a newly-manufactured Teddy Ruxpin, marketed towards the target audience, today, possibly be considered dated? Teddy was definitely ahead of his time in the 1980s, but the thing is, going on what's on the market, he still is now.

I should mention that last Christmas, one such one-trick electronic toy - an "interactive" bunny that made sounds and wiggled its nose if you placed an included toy carrot in its mouth - was tipped for the Christmas number-one slot in the UK. I don't believe it was successful. I was most amused when my mother mentioned to me about having seen it, with the most unimpressed look on her face that you could possibly imagine, before stating, "Why are they making boring, overpriced rubbish like this? It's nowhere near as good as Teddy Ruxpin was, and he was around more than 25 years ago!". She went on to express, more-or-less as I'm doing here, that mediocrity seems to be considered an advancement, now, for some reason, just because more technology is being thrown at it.

It's all too easy for people to get caught up in adding all sorts of whiz-bang bells-and-whistles and tie-ins to hugely expensive supporting products like tablet computers (i.e., products usually aimed at the grown-ups) which are not linked to the toy or meant for youngsters at all, and thinking that this somehow magically makes something "better" or "modern", but this is certainly not so. The best-selling toys still remain those of a fairly "traditional" stripe, generally - such as plush toys (my own field!), board and dice games, card games, role-playing items and toy props, action figures and dolls, and novelty items such as cap guns or potato guns, water pistols, and so on. These are all mainstays of childhood, many over a century (or more) old, and nobody considers these "dated", either - indeed, because they fire the imagination like nothing else, they never will be considered such. Electronic plushes are commonplace enough now that they're also a fairly common part of childhood, too, which leads me to believe that none of the target audience of today would consider Teddy Ruxpin to be out-of-date at all.

This note about the target audience brings me neatly onto my next point. Kids, and indeed most people, don't actually care about technology. Unsuccessful high-tech products, for whatever age-group, are almost always unsuccessful because they require people to adapt their lives around the technology in some way, rather than the technology fitting into the customers' lives neatly - the focus must always be on what the gear does for people and their lives, rather than on the technology for the sake of the technology. Just compare early mobile telephones, which only worked if you were in particular buildings that had contracts to house transmitters for particular service providers and which did not take off with the public at all, with those of today, which huge numbers of people own because they fit into their lives without hassle.

Why am I pointing this out? Because in the case of Teddy Ruxpin, the technology is just a means to an end, and has no difficulty in fitting into people's lives - it's merely one half of a two-part vehicle for delivering the stories, and the stories are what people actually care about. Indeed, the fact that 1970s stop-motion animated TV series (such as Bagpuss, The Wombles, The Herbs, and so on) still enchant today's children can only be taken as living proof of this! They, and, again, most people, don't care that the animation might look "old" to some - it's just a vehicle for telling stories.

I mentioned above that Teddy's technology is just one half of a whole. The other half is the books. Real, paper books, *not* books for e-readers. Why? Because children's books in electronic format barely sell, and, moreover, the devices they're so often read on are not as conducive to learning to read due to their multi-purpose nature as paper books are. (I prefer e-books for space reasons, as I don't have a lot of storage room for print books, and for the fact that reading from a backlit screen is much kinder on my eyes, but for my future children, I would be certain to provide them with a library of paper books and a library card, as I believe that learning to read from tangible books is a key formative experience - going on the article that I linked to here, it seems that I am far from the only one holding this point of view. Indeed, my own childhood would not have been the same without access to various wonderful tomes - including Teddy's own books - and the feeling of interacting with them as I turned the pages, beheld the illustrations if there were any, and so on. They were also a key part of learning to treat delicate objects with care and respect, which I think is an important thing to learn early on.)

Now, all of this is not to say that value-adds such as computer/tablet interactivity can't also be beneficial or fun (or both), but they should never need to be a focus (indeed, the feeling of being required to own additional expensive consumer goods for whatever reason, is likely to lead to a feeling of Teddy's technology not having been designed to fit into everyday life). The markets just don't bear that out (ancient types of toys are still enduringly popular and very likely always will be due to the way in which they relate to the human condition; The kids of today still love to watch/read what their parents and grandparents watched/read; And e-books for children really don't sell and this is showing no signs of changing), and there's a lot to be said for keeping things relatively simple; "Less is more", as they say, and it is for this reason, and those that I explored above, that I do not believe Teddy Ruxpin to be dated, and that I feel he would be just as relevant to children today if he were to, hypothetically, be relaunched tomorrow with marketing aimed squarely at the kids of today instead of the now-grown-up ones of 25 to 30 years ago.

This concludes my thoughts on Teddy and his technology, and their place in the lives of kids today. I would be most interested to know what everyone else thinks, and why.

[Deleted]

First of all, I would like to say I thoroughly enjoyed your very logical, very eloquent article, so much so, in fact, that I've chosen to add my own response.

As I understand it, and as has been pointed out, BackPack Toys did not have a large budget to produce or market the 2006 incarnation of Teddy Ruxpin. This is a huge factor to consider in that particular Teddy's success and failures. In general, I completely agree with your assessment that a toy (or any product) should be marketed at the demographic it was designed for, and not at a demographic who has largely "outgrown" it (as far as the industry is concerned.)

Let's also consider that when the 2006 Teddy launched, it was mildly successful as compared to the 1998 YES! Entertainment version, who vanished almost over night. I remember getting e-mails from BackPack Toys stating that the demand for their Teddy was far greater initially than they had anticipated, and my Teddy arrived months later than scheduled. Whether this was because the company was struggling or because demand really did exceed expectations, I cannot say, but it was clear in either case they were not prepared for the number of orders they eventually received, and one must also consider how many orders were cancelled as people refused to wait for their product over the ensuing weeks and months.

This I state only to prove that the demand for Teddy is there, and so to move the discussion into another part of this arena.

On the budget we assumed BackPack Toys was saddled with, we have to consider how much was allocated towards the marketing of the toy. It seemed that BackPack Toys was counting very much on the internet and communities like this forum and the accompanying website to promote Teddy. Indeed, there was only ever one commercial for the BackPack Toys Teddy Ruxpin, and the only place I ever viewed it was through their website. Not once did I see it aired on television or even on YouTube, and of course, it was aimed at those who remembered Teddy, rather than the children who would be playing with him. Advertising over social media is another key factor in marketing today's products. When I log in to Facebook I see ads related to my browsing habits. Lately I have seen advertisements for Peter Jackson's "The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey," because the tracking cookies in my browser know that I pre-ordered tickets for a showing next week. I wonder how many people (discounting the members of this forum) are actively searching for Teddy Ruxpin.

Again, BackPack Toys' budget must be taken into account when considering the avenues of advertising they chose, and that brings me to my main point.

If I were BackPack Toys, and I had "x" number of dollars to spend on marketing, I have two choices:

1.) THE TARGET DEMOGRAPHIC

I gear my marketing campaign towards the target demographic. This is the "Ages 3 and Up" demographic that Teddy's box indicates is his main audience. Of course, television is still their #1 source for the "I want" factor. Even now, a full 27 years after Teddy's emergence, my little brother and sister (4 and 8, respectively) still point to the TV every day as the commercials swim by and scream "I want that!" These children are not looking for internet advertising. They're not looking for word-of-mouth. They are simply looking to be shown a product and why they should want it, and it needs to be done in a way, as was pointed out, that is organically part of their lives. If they have to go out of their way to find it, they won't. Thus, putting an ad on the manufacturer's website does nothing to entice these children to your product. However, the cost of producing that commercial, however simple, and then the cost of purchasing air-time for that commercial, is considerable. On a "shoe-string" budget, this would probably result in a.) a poorly produced marketing campaign, or b.) less exposure to the target demographic than intended due to lack of financial backing.

Commercials for Teddy probably would have been most effective during programming blocks like the "Playhouse Disney" and "Nick Jr." hours (these programming blocks now have their own dedicated stations, and would probably have done just as well). Also, there is a channel known as "The Hub", which seems to specialize in older programs such as "Fraggle Rock", the original "Transformers", and other 80's nostalgia that still appeals to the younger generation. Teddy's exposure may have worked well here, as well.

Again, we must consider the measure of exposure Teddy would have gotten on a tight budget even in such perfectly suitable markets.

2.) THE NOSTALGIA FACTOR

I target my product towards the generation that remembers Teddy. In this case, you are gearing your product toward a built-in fan base that already knows what the product is and does. They know what to expect, and they know where to find more information about it. While 3 year-olds are not likely to visit the manufacturer's website, adults can simply click a link and be transported there for more information about the toy.

The obvious advantage here is that you get people interested without the expenditure of finances to educate them on the product. There is no need to watch a commercial, no need to pay a network money to air the commercial, and no need to hope that nostalgic adults don't walk away during the commercials so that they can actually see it.

Moreover, with a built-in fanbase, much of the marketing is done for you. Fans begin talking about the new Teddy. They share links on their Facebook, they tweet about him, they reminisce, and suddenly your ad campaign works itself.

This is most likely what Cyborg Illiop has called in his artcile, the "safe bet" campaign, because it relies on the nostalgia to market itself rather than spending their own money to recreate the aura around the toy that sparked the imagination in the 80's. While it's true it relies on the nostalgia to gravitate people towards the product, it does alienate to some extent, the target demographic. At the same time, while I certainly have no data to support this, I can only assume that BackPack Toys reached more adults through this method of marketing than they may have reached children through other means, such as Method 1 above.

It's a common notion in business and marketing that you may have the greatest product in the world, but it won't matter to anyone if nobody knows about it. I believe this is the chief cause of BackPack Toys' Teddy's inability to soar in a market flooded with useless, cheap electronics.

Furbies are back in style. Those obnoxious little fob-esque creatures that jiggle and giggle and blink and squeak when you touch them or talk to them. The movements aren't synced in any particular way. The patterns of their mouth and eyes seem generic. They are no bigger than the palm of my hand. Yet people are shelling out tons of money because the kids see the commercials on TV and suddenly want to play with them.

Advertising is still the most important outlet to get any response from any demographic. I owned the original Teddy Ruxpin from 1985. I still have him and love him dearly. By 1991 I had about 75% of the tapes and books and a few outfits, and I was very happy with my Teddy. He was my best friend.

Still, I remember almost jumping through the ceiling when I saw a commercial for a new Teddy Ruxpin. This one took cartridges rather than cassettes! This one had paperback books rather than hardcover books, and the colors were different than the ones I was used to! "The Airship" book was no long that golden honey brown: it was blue! A blue "Airship" book? That was unheard of! Blue is my favorite color! "The Airship" must look wonderful with a blue cover! And that Teddy Ruxpin looks new and sharp and sounds so clear! He looks different than mine!

And I must have him!

I had a toy in my room that did the same exact thing as the toy on TV, but I wanted this new one for no other reason than that it was different and new.

That is the power of advertising. Those Furbies can't hold a candle to something like Teddy Ruxpin, but everyone wants one. Not because they are a better product, but because the television says they are the thing to have. That is the power of marketing not for nostalgia, but for your target audience. As adults, we have the power to turn down our wants and our feeble desires for things like new toys. Children thrive on it. Adults can say "no" to television. Children depend on it.

Let's take a look at some of the commercials from the 80's and Teddy's initial campaign:

Show and Tell

Probably the most common ad from the 1980's this commercial showcased Teddy as the best toy at Show and Tell. What kid didn't want to walk in to class and "wow" the entire room with the most awesome thing ever? This kid does just that.

Happy Birthday Teddy!

The perfect accessory to Teddy, this ad is noted for a couple of things. a.) The kids are having a birthday party for Teddy: not a birthday party for a kid. This personifies Teddy as a living, breathing friend rather than simply a "toy". b.) There are no adults in this ad whatsoever. These are kids having a kids party. This makes the experience uniquely theirs, and something "secret" that adults "wouldn't understand". This is so very important because kids need to feel like they are being talked "to", not used or talked "at". That is one of the best things about Teddy's marketing and Teddy's production in general.

On the School Bus

Again, the discovery of Teddy Ruxpin from a child's perspective. The kids are looking at him and are amazed. The bus driver is more or less clueless, which is perfect, because that's how most kids probably feel when it comes to things they enjoy that parents just can't grasp.

Putting on a Show

This shows Teddy and Grubby being shown off by kids for kids. Two children are showing the toys to their infant sibling, who is also enjoying it. Again, this is all about the kids enjoying the toy and getting the chance to be "cool" in front of other kids: they get to be the "adults" showing the "child" the toy rather than all of them being talked to by an adult. It also shows the infant enjoying the toy, which implies the universal nature of the toys and the stories.

It is almost universally accepted that the 2006 Teddy Ruxpin is the best iteration of the toy since his debut in 1985. Indeed, this toy, more than any other, bore the most resemblance to his 20 year old counterpart. He used MP3 cartridges over the archaic cassettes, which boasted superior sound quality and eliminated the hassle of "unwinding" damaged tapes. He came with two stories instead of one for each cartridge. You could argue that part of the reason Teddy didn't sell well was because of his price point (TJ Bearytales was $19.99-$29.99), and the price of his books and tapes (which were half the price of their 1985 counterparts), but even in 2006, Teddy Ruxpin was a great value.

We know these facts, because we, as fans, have followed Teddy Ruxpin's technological journey. I wonder how many children 3 and up would actually care.

Take a look at those commercials above. Which one talks about the technology that makes Teddy work? Sure, there's always a line at the end about him coming with "storybook and cassette", but which commercial actually tells you what makes Teddy work?

Kids don't care what makes the toy tick. They care about the toy itself. Who is Teddy Ruxpin? Why do I want to get to know him? How does Teddy Ruxpin feel about getting to know me? The "what" is completely irrelevant. No kid cared what kind of tapes he took, just like no kid in 2006 cared what kind of cartrdiges he took. They loved Teddy for Teddy, not what made him work. The appeal of Teddy has and always will be in the stories: the idea th kids to be transported away somewhere with their best friend and have adventures that were their own. That is what Worlds of Wonder was marketing to those kids: they were marketing a friend.

I would love to see how Teddy would fare with the backing of a major manufacturer, because he is still incredibly relevant to today's generation of kids (and hopefully many generations after), but what BackPack Toys failed to do was create the sense of awe and friendship around the toy that Worlds of Wonder did in 1985. There was an aura around that toy that made every kid want it and every parent desperate to get it. It has never--ever--worked the other way around.

As Walt Disney once said, "I don't believe in playing down to children." Teddy should never play down to them. He should always play with them.

[TRO Admin]

Wow. What a fascinating conversation here you two. I will add a brief two cents here.

BackPack indeed was successful compared to Yes! Entertainment's efforts. I get a bad wrap for 'talking smack' on TeddyIII, but I really don't hate the product at all - what I am disappointed in is missed opportunities. The late 90's would have probably been the best time for Teddy to make a full scale comeback. Name recognition would have been at a higher level than it was in 2006 or today - the economy was in much better shape, leading to more folks purchasing the product on impulse, and technology had not yet advanced to the point where a teddy bear would have been competing with an ipod for room in a proverbial shopping basket.
Teddy could have then been slowly updated, adopting new technologies and being at the forefront of technological advances, at the same time millions of people were falling in love with the characters and storylines. It would have been a success on a lot of fronts.

Yes! blew it. By mostly their own fault(s). They were coming off successes such as the Yak Back and could have introduced the traditional Teddy, using cassette tapes, in a high quality fashion that also made economical sense. I'm not sure Yes! would be around today regardless of the mistakes they made in the 90's - the toy landscape has changed that much - but they could have been a great placeholder for Teddy.

By the time 2005 rolled around, a startup called BackPack Toys, with good intentions, decided to give the traditional Teddy his fourth incarnation (a fourth go-round... not even Michael Jordan got that. There's no way Teddy has been unsuccessful) as a startup, they lacked the funds necessary to roll out a large scale technological advance or a winning marketing strategy. As you pointed out, Vincent, they relied on word of mouth and viral marketing, which was somewhat of a new concept. They also openly admitted they were relying on nostalgia sales rather than newbies. The thought was grandparents who were parents in the 80's would buy for grandkids, and the older of the kids who initially played with Teddy were now becoming parents and would buy for their own children. In 2013, these strategies might very well have worked to bring Teddy back to the marketplace in a meaningful way. Teddy's been mentioned in multiple TV shows and movies since 2009 and the name seems to have a buzz around it, much more so than it did when BackPack began. In 2006 though, there were just not enough social media addicts, YouTube wasn't yet a household name, and there weren't quite as many kids of first generation Teddy fans as BackPack thought there were.

I think the winning strategy for the next run isn't to focus on nostalgia or on technological advancements as the key component to marketing - it will be to focus on the characters and the stories. Without a physical unit that moved it's mouth and eyes as the stories were told, we may never have had Teddy Ruxpin. But without Teddy Ruxpin, the talking toy would just be a bunch of "thingamajig's". Technological advancements will make a toy more commercially viable. Nostalgia will shave off some marketing dollars. Letting people fall in love with these characters will be like winning the lotto.

Technology will always advance and products can adapt. People don't fall in love with technology, except when it's brand new. The cassette tapes from the 80's would be in the garbage if they didn't hold Teddy's stories within them. When people fall in love with a story, when something in it takes a hold of their heart and imagination, they will follow it through any wacky technological trend. Teddy is capable of this. We are the proof.

[lachlant1984]

What a fantastic article, I love it, this is such an eye-opening article, it really is. I know in the past that I've suggested that interactive computer software for Teddy Ruxpin would be a good idea, but maybe I focused on that too much in recent posts, but I should have made it clear that I don't think that any new version of Teddy Ruxpin should solely be based on some sort of computer connectivity type arrangement, I think such features should be optional to users who want them, I just wanted to get that point out of the way first, I may have more to say about this in the future, but right now I don't have much else to say. I read your points about E-books for children not selling well, but what do you think of devices such as the LeapFrog LeapPad Explorer 2? My 3 year old cousin got one for Christmas, I played with it on Christmas Day and I couldn't put it down, I couldn't resist buying one for myself. I know there are Interactive E-books available for it, I understand that the E-books for the LeapPad 2 may be similar in a lot of ways to the Broderbund Software Living Books series of CD-ROM games from the early 90s, do any of you remember them? Do you know how well interactive E-book content for devices like the LeapPad 2 is selling compared to, say E-books for kids on the Amazon Kindle or iPad? You can buy software cartridges for the LeapPad 2, so it's not a requirement that you establish an account on the LeapFrog website or connect your LeapPad 2 to a computer if you have one for your child, but it's an option that gives you and your child a lot more scope for things to do. I think E-books as the sole media for Teddy Ruxpin would be a very bad idea indeed, a very very bad idea, the whole idea behind Teddy Ruxpin was to introduce young children to reading, that said, LeapFrog do have a system called the Tag Reader I believe, it's a small pen like device with specially designed books, when you place the pen against the pages of specially designed books words are announced and sounded out, I think that would be a great option for Teddy Ruxpin, but I must stress the word optional feature, not something that everyone must use in order to basically use the toy. I still think that the main content for Teddy Ruxpin should be on physical media with print paper books, but I think additional content available as digital downloads would ad some nice changes, maybe i'm missing the whole point of this article.

You're absolutely right about the 2006 version of Teddy Ruxpin being market towards the nostalgia, market, I've seen the ad on YouTube, it oozes nostalgia and practically screams at you "You know you want to live your childhood memories with this toy, but your kids can use it too, but you know you're the one who wants it more," maybe I'm just misunderstanding the ad, but that's how I saw it. I do have a TJ Bearytales, and you're right, he's not well liked, even by me, and I'll tell you why, it's because the stories aren't anywhere near as exciting as the ones for Teddy Ruxpin, TJ Bearytales also uses a lot of patronising childish language, Mummy, Daddy, etc, Teddy Ruxpin does not do that and never has, also, the stories for Teddy Ruxpin were much better written, and from a technical standpoint were much better produced compared to the stories for TJ Bearytales, also the tapes for Teddy Ruxpin covered a much broader subject base than TJ Bearytales. That's about all I have to say for now, but I really think you've done a fantastic job on this article, very well produced and very well thought out and written. I'm beginning to wonder if LeapFrog Toys would be a good candidate for producing a new version of Teddy Ruxpin.

[lachlant1984]

If a 5 year old child were to see the ad for the 2006 Teddy Ruxpin, do you think they'd be interested in it? I somehow don't think so.

[Deleted]

There've been so many good contributions to this thread that I almost don't know what to add! Thankyou for that, and thankyou for the compliments on the article, also - I really appreciate it.

Anyway, I did want to comment some more on T.J. Bearytales, and a couple of other thoughts...

Jan 11, 2013 4:03:59 GMT -7 lachlant1984 said:

I do have a TJ Bearytales, and you're right, he's not well liked, even by me, and I'll tell you why, it's because the stories aren't anywhere near as exciting as the ones for Teddy Ruxpin, TJ Bearytales also uses a lot of patronising childish language, Mummy, Daddy, etc, Teddy Ruxpin does not do that and never has, also, the stories for Teddy Ruxpin were much better written, and from a technical standpoint were much better produced compared to the stories for TJ Bearytales, also the tapes for Teddy Ruxpin covered a much broader subject base than TJ Bearytales.

Since writing the article originally, I've since watched a bit of footage of T.J. Bearytales on YouTube, and, well, to say the least I wasn't extremely impressed. I can see how he would appeal to some, but his stories definitely seem to be a lot more mundane than even the mildest of Teddy Ruxpin's tales!

One thing that also jumped out at me was the complete lack of diversity in the characters. We unfortunately live in a world where others label others very readily, and yet the Teddy Ruxpin series felt no need to make the merest mention of the characters in its universe being equally as wide-ranging as people in the real world - this was just the way it was, and the subtle message was that acceptance is important and that differences don't matter. Yet, this was never fussed over, and never emphasised in any way, which I think is just how it should be; People are just people, not labels, and that's just the way it is. I mention this purely because T.J.'s stories struck me as lacking something by seemingly not approaching this at all, by being, I dare say, a bit more "generic", for want of a better term.

Then there's T.J.'s rather dumbed-down manner of speaking, complete with speech impediments that I would imagine no sane parent would want their child picking up. After all, we soak up vocabulary and information like a sponge at a young age, and to a degree we mimic what we're exposed to as we pick all of that stuff up - would anyone here prefer for any youngsters of theirs to be learning deliberately impaired words such as "dwink", over mind-stretching terms such as "aerodynamic", for example? That's the sort of difference that I very quickly picked up on.

Also, through having a more mundane setting for the stories (and those horrible songs...), T.J.'s stories didn't strike me as having the potential to spark the imagination as much - something which is essential for future creativity, expression, and communication as we grow older. (As I once read in a video game, "Imagination is a wonderful toy." - it seems to me that Teddy offered much more, in this department.)

I'm beginning to wonder if LeapFrog Toys would be a good candidate for producing a new version of Teddy Ruxpin.

The more I think about this, the more I think this is the way to go. LeapFrog is, in some ways, a lot like a modern equivalent of Worlds of Wonder, and they seem to have a good knowledge and a lot of experience of leveraging characters, stories, and technology, without ever making an unnecessary fuss about the technology part. They also never present their output as "This is what your parents liked when they were children!" - even all the classic characters, like Mickey Mouse (who is 85 years old, now) and so on, are presented as fresh and new, and there to join the audience on their journey.

Jan 11, 2013 4:10:42 GMT -7 lachlant1984 said:

If a 5 year old child were to see the ad for the 2006 Teddy Ruxpin, do you think they'd be interested in it? I somehow don't think so.

This is possibly a controversial statement, but I'd have to say that, even as an adult and a lifelong Teddy fan, I didn't find the advertisement to be particularly appealing either. That's possibly more because it seemed to be squarely aimed at US audiences, and was very different to how Teddy was originally promoted over here in the UK, though. (As well as my previous criticism about taking the nostalgia route, of course. I would have to admit that they were way ahead of their time with the "social media" approach, though!)

[Deleted]

Ya to tell ya the truth. I think the new Teddy should be produced by fisher price instead. Look at the other animated toys they've produced. Also the new commercial I believe should kind of be like that one 1986 one with all the characters popping out of the books etc. though I believe Teddy should be first advertised with the show. Then the talking toy. Cause then if the kids see the cartoon first they may want their own Teddy to talk to,etc,etc. and when they see the commercial they'll be begging their parents to get it for them. Oh ya and btw, I know alot of people don't agree with me on this but since I grew up with the red t-shirt and blue pants 1998 Teddy. I believe the toy should come wearing that outfit but also with the tunic included inside for the hardcore fans that grew up with the 80's version

[Fen]

Great article! Also, I liked villicles response. The idea of creating something that does not "talk down" but "talk to" the intended group is priceless.

Voltron has gone through a similar trend. There were toys made to be played with, but at voltron's anniversary a toy company (Toynami) released a "Masterpiece Edition" model for $600.00 to be displayed by the fans.

I'd like to see that with Teddy. Something for the fans, and something practical for their kids.

[sparkpikachu]

I agree that Teddy Ruxpin is not dated. He can still be relevant to modern kids because of the great stories and important morals he teaches. I also feel that paper books are a really good idea. Don't get me wrong, I love my Teddy, but the toy company could have approached it differently. I know that a lot of people use smart phones and apps, but if I had kids, I would want physical books to be available because it would teach them not to completely depend on technology. There could be a code or something that Teddy could scan on the book to allow new stories to be downloaded, which would be helpful for people who can't use the app. It would also prevent people from buying the stories again if Teddy had to be replaced. I'm sure a lot of us here would also prefer if unedited stories were available. Some of the edits make the stories start strangely, like "The Airship" and "Teddy's Birthday". I think not having the beginning conversation in "The Airship" doesn't establish the same bond as with the original version. Also, "Teddy's Birthday" starts with Grubby saying that everyone knows Teddy's name. It feels like arriving in the middle of a conversation. At least, the audio should be cleaned up a bit. I've noticed several little blips, like the one I mentioned before in "The Day Teddy Met Grubby". Page jingles are also partially there in many of the stories, and in "The Missing Princess", parts of Grubby's words are missing. They are doing a fairly good job but some changes could really help to make Teddy more relevant to a much wider audience. This is why I am so strongly for additions to allow blind people a greater understanding of Teddy's world. If I could do something to make these kinds of changes happen, I would.

[late2theparty]

Quite an interesting and well thought out discussion here.  But the basic question as stated is whether Teddy Ruxpin is relevant to today's kids...of more succinctly, would they be interested at all.  I will refer here to a string that began with a question posted here by Kitkat on November 28th of last year.  Open the string and then scroll down to a photo posted there on January 9th.  This would seem to answer that question.  And it tracks my own experience as a father whose daughter got Teddy in 1985 and who many years later wondered if he still worked, and accordingly arrived at this site late to the party.  I've given Teddies I have repaired to kids of the current young generation, wondering what they would think of him.  The only negative in the reports that came back is that their parents had to limit access.  And when taking these kids a "new" book and tape for their Teddy a while later, they all were ecstatic to receive it. So there's no question in my mind that kids of today would readily be interested in Teddy.


There is, however, a "but" to all of this, and that's the marketing issue.  As has always been the case and still is, for kids to say "I want" they have to see.  And it doesn't really seem, at least IMHO, that any of the companies behind the reincarnations of Teddy Ruxpin have been able to hit a formula to tap into that reality.  There would seem to be a simple solution that could be utilized, but it would require financial ability and as always could stumble over legalities which always seem to be myriad where Teddy is concerned.  But the animated shows exist  Syndicate, get them back on the tube, and utilize the shows to advertise the product. Not only would it advertise Teddy as a character and toy, but would familiarize the parents, who do make the final decision, with the stories which, as noted in the initial post above, are really an equal part of what Teddy Ruxpin was and still is about.  Again though, what seems a no brainer is often not as simple as it seems. But it seems that it may be there, provided that marketing strategy would and could be pursued. 

[kitkat]

I have to agree with late2theparty -- for kids to want Teddy, they need to see him. Nowadays, children are watching Netflix and YouTube (I cringe). If the tv show were to somehow make its way onto Netflix, I guarantee kids will love him as a character and want all the toys associated with him. I gave my 3.5 yr old son a WOW Teddy for Christmas, but I had him watch some of the cartoons on YouTube first. When he opened the box, he gave a loud gasp and knew exactly who was staring back at him.

Right now the WCT Teddy is a little like Daniel Tiger without the tv show. I don't think he will stick unless they find a way for him to enter the home as an everyday character once again. I think they're going the wrong way with creating those Sing-a-long toys as well. They need to expand the universe and create merchandise that can really create a collection for a Teddy fan at home. Toy Grubby is great, but outfits and accessories for their star product would have made a little more sense. A few plastic figurines and some play sets would be well-received as well.

I do think that children now can and would really love Teddy as a character, but their actual Teddy preference would depend on the other toys they have at home. For my kids, I avoid tablets, noisy electronic toys, etc. For them, the WOW Teddy is completely mind-blowing since they've never encountered anything like him. If they had a lot of the electronic one-trick-ponies like the FurReal animals that are pretty popular now, I don't know if he would be as impactful. For kids who are hooked to tablets (shudder), they would probably prefer the WCT version since he is a bit more flashy. It makes me unbelieveably sad when I see kids who cant tolerate a physical book, but I can go on about that for hours, lol.

[pika62221]

By a technological standpoint he's totally dated. By a story standpoint since they didn't use specific events, were very neutral in the stories, then no, he's not dated. This is where the debate comes in, because just like when a child age 4 or 5 sees an 8-track (for those who don't know, look it up) they'd have no idea how to use it, because it's a dated technology. However, if the songs on that 8-track were released in a digital medium today where that same child heard it, then they can be familiar with the music, thus it's not "dated" in that sense (of course certain sounds in music will generally tell you the era they were most popular in). You get the point, technology wise, dated and old ("C" batteries are also becoming harder and harder to find to say the least), story wise, not really.

[retrobear]

Wow this is a very interesting thread. I agree that they should bring the cartoon to TV and Netflix so kids will see them and get to know Teddy. Back in the 80s when he was the first toy of his kind that type of marketing worked, but in today's market where there are so many electronic toys the focus needs to be on the stories, and kids need to actually get to see the stories before they will want to play with him. The stories, after all, are what are timeless.